Navigate:

Four roadblocks to Mitt Romney’s energy plan

Romney’s given himself seven years to achieve energy independence. | Reuters

But Romney’s efforts to encourage a sweeping expansion of U.S. offshore oil production would expose him to the same set of challenges faced by Obama, who has been president amid record increases in domestic oil and gas production despite fallout from the 2010 Gulf of Mexico disaster.

Jay Hakes, a former Clinton-era director of the Energy Information Administration, noted that oil companies like Shell are on their way to getting the green light from the Obama administration to drill offshore in Alaska despite significant opposition from environmentalists. If the energy industry pushes harder, he predicts trouble.

Text Size

-

+

reset

“If they got everything they wanted, I can almost guarantee you there’d be a huge backlash, the tourism industry in Florida for one,” said Hakes, author of the 2008 book “A Declaration of Energy Independence” that concludes there’s no economically feasible way for the U.S. to ever get to zero oil imports.

The environmental community also would be itching to fight Romney. As they proved during the George W. Bush administration, greens often are most effective when forced to play defense.

“The energy independence plan that truly matters is the one that makes us independent of dirty energy sources that are destroying our health and our planet. And the Romney energy plan makes no progress toward that goal,” said Gene Karpinski, president of the League of Conservation Voters, a green group that has endorsed Obama’s reelection. “His plan is of, by and for his Big Oil buddies.”

Many of Romney’s other energy ideas also come with catches. If approved in its entirety, the Keystone pipeline that’s been central to the GOP political agenda would give Canada access to world markets with its tar sands oils — not the direct line into American gas tanks that Republicans often suggest. The Canadians, Hakes said, “want it so they can export to other places.”

Drilling plan a 'nonstarter'

Romney’s plan would give states pretty much carte blanche to impose their existing permitting and regulatory powers when it comes to drilling on federal lands. “Maximum flexibility to ascertain what is most appropriate,” the campaign said in a 21-page white paper detailing its plan, noting that it would speed up a process that can take just shy of a year under current federal policies.

While giving states greater control over drilling on federal lands is an idea long advocated by conservative lawmakers, mainly from the West, it’s also sure to run into a groundswell of opposition from Democrats, including the kinds of moderates Romney would need to build a working coalition.

“It’s a nonstarter for the federal government to retreat and say we don’t care what you want to do on federal lands,” said former North Dakota Sen. Byron Dorgan, one of the most outspoken Democrats when it comes to energy production. “It’s not in our national interest.”

The rest of North America doesn’t need to cooperate

Romney’s plan calls for North American energy independence, but that relies on two countries he wouldn’t have authority over even if elected.

While U.S. relations with the two neighbors are currently good, that’s not always been the case. “Suppose we get into a dispute with Mexico over immigration,” Hakes said.

Other parts of the Romney energy plan are largely retreads that seem unlikely to help him get to his 2020 goal, including a call for updated seismic assessments of the nation’s onshore and offshore resources. Romney said the information is needed to know what potential domestic sources can still be tapped. But Bush signed energy legislation in 2005 requiring exactly this kind of updated inventory — on everything from oil to natural gas to coal.

Flint said Romney’s proposal was “interesting” by making the independence pledge for North America.

“It seems he’s at least being pragmatic enough to recognize that we would have to use Canadian resources if we stood a chance of getting to ‘independence’ because of the transportation sector,” Flint said. “What I wonder though is, why would we drive prices of those resources up if we can buy them cheaper elsewhere?”

This article first appeared on POLITICO Pro at 1:53 p.m. on August 23, 2012.

ROMNEY CAN'T THINK ANY MORE--MAY BE IS IS SIMPLY A POLITICAL OPPORTUNIST AND LIAR WHO WOULD SAY AND DO ANYTHING IN THE HOPE OF GETTING ELECTED. His so-called "energy plan" is simple a self-serving gibberish handed to him by the Koch Brothers, Dick Cheney and the oil lobby all of who do not want the development of alternative sources of energy. This fool thinks he can achieve America's energy independence by only total reliance of fossil fuel. The math doesn't add up. Amazing!

ROMNEY CAN'T THINK ANY MORE OR GETTING SENILE. OR, MAY BE HE IS SIMPLY A POLITICAL OPPORTUNIST AND LIAR AS HE HAS BEEN CAST WHO WOULD SAY AND DO ANYTHING IN THE HOPE OF GETTING ELECTED. His so-called "energy plan" is simple a self-serving gibberish handed to him by the Koch Brothers, Dick Cheney and the oil lobby all of who do not want the development of alternative sources of energy. This fool thinks he can achieve America's energy independence by only total reliance of fossil fuel. The math doesn't add up. Amazing!

Sorry, Mitt, but it is pie in the sky. Your "drill, baby, drill" plan continues the same horribly costly tax breaks and subsidies, with no estimate of cost to the taxpayer, the environment or climate change.

In addition you want UNLIMITED Drilling offshore and on Federal Lands (nothing like destroying our parklands, ecosystems and future reserves). Roll back of all regulations that protect public health and safety and want to continue our dependence on fossil fuels while China kicks our ass on lower cost, safer and more sustainable solar.

Exactly what century are you living in Romney? Oil is sooo 20th century, when we are well over a decade in the 21st.

ROMNEY CAN'T THINK ANY MORE--MAY BE IS IS SIMPLY A POLITICAL OPPORTUNIST AND LIAR WHO WOULD SAY AND DO ANYTHING IN THE HOPE OF GETTING ELECTED. His so-called "energy plan" is simple a self-serving gibberish handed to him by the Koch Brothers, Dick Cheney and the oil lobby all of who do not want the development of alternative sources of energy. This fool thinks he can achieve America's energy independence by only total reliance of fossil fuel. The math doesn't add up. Amazing!

What experts are you talking about? Or maybe it's how many so called experts are you speaking of? And what do you consider independence? Experts I know of, and I am part of that group in the energy field, know that energy independence for the US is possible. That is having access to energy resources that does not hold us hostage. We have enough domestic energy sources to offset our dependence on unfriendly foreign oil, tipping the scales in our favor. Romney, at least, is on the right path. Obama, wants to keep us dependent on government, domestic and foreign. It is part of the bigger "one world government" plan.

“We won’t need to buy any more oil from the Middle East or Venezuela or anywhere else where we don’t want to.”

Oil is sold on a global market. It doesn't matter where it comes out of the ground, it's all part of the same pool. Opening up more federal land to exploitation might make the price come down a little five years from now, but it wont prevent the price from spiking if there's ever a crisis that jeopardizes a major supplier like Venezuela or Saudi Arabia.

There are two ways to insulate ourselves from oil shocks:

1. nationalize the American oil industry.

2. drastically reduce American demand for oil.

I am pretty confident that Romney is not advocating either of those positions.

How many conservatives will gloss over the fact that this article points out that foreign oil imports are down to 45% under Pres. Obama -- compared to 60%+ under Pres. Bush 43?

I like how you gloss over the fact that the main reason oil imports are down is because of higher global prices and reduced growth in the US due to the Great Recession (which I imagine is the Bush policy that @OneTermPrez is talking about).

There is nothing possible unless you try it. The critics go right after what Romney has said few minutes ago and give their opinion and say this is impossible. That's why we need a leader who can make that impossible happen. Romney is a LEADER and he will make that happen. so sit back and relax all your so called EXPERTS.

How many conservatives will gloss over the fact that this article points out that foreign oil imports are down to 45% under Pres. Obama -- compared to 60%+ under Pres. Bush 43?

I like how you gloss over the fact that the main reason oil imports are down is because of higher global prices and reduced growth in the US due to the Great Recession (which I imagine is the Bush policy that @OneTermPrez is talking about).

Bush caused the Dems "FREE HOUSES" program to crash?

Bush spent a Trillion Dollars as a slush fund for campaign cash bundlers?

Bush stopped the Keystone Pipeline?

At what point does SleezyPreezy bear responsibility for his actions and policies???

Oh I forgot...he's half-black...he can't be held responsible...that would be RACIST

OBAMA 2008--YES WE CAN

OBAMA 2012--IT'S NOT MY FAULT

Well at least Barry closed GITMO and ended that evil PATRIOT ACT...oops

Those would be the experts that opted into obungholes 'hope and change' with no specifics, not a shred of experience doing squat except voting present, and a litany of communist manifesto ramblings in dingy institutions. You mean those experts? Why would anyone give any of 'those' experts two cents of their time to determine what can or cannot be done; they've faulted themselves before even flapping lip one. Obunghole is a joke, a communist and truly a felon based upon the ridiculous computer generated documents he tried to pass of as legitimate and the fast and furious contempt charge. What ya hiding obunghole? When are you gonna fess up to what it is you have to hide?

experts? who needs 'em? mitt sure doesn't. fact checkers? who needs facts? not mitt. something like 12 - 15 different fact checkers have slammed his "Obama's gutting the welfare work requirement!!" screed - no matter. if 100 of them did, he'd still smile and call it the truth. one thing he hasn't realized is that by falsely accusing Obama of this, he is by default ALSO accusing the republican governors who requested the program of the same thing. i'd be very interested to hear their thoughts on that . . .

Ah, the old devil\'s advocate argument. Thinking like that never put a man on the Moon.

At least Romney is putting out a plan. Obama-I just see obstructionism.

So the truth brother. I did a quick search and didn't find too many articles about JFK's plan to put a man on the moon in 1961 but he had the ability to dream and encourage us to dream. Yes it is out of our reach today - but tomorrow it may not be. We need to challenge ourselves to do more, reach further and try harder. It is called a challenge - it is what Steve Jobs did with Apple. It is what all successful companies do - they change the paradigm or a paradigm shift.

We can be more people! We are the USA - we lead the world not because we say we do but because we continue to prove it over and over again. It is not the government that does it but the government helps provide some of the incentive so that private industry gets involved and takes the necessary risks needed to actually succeed. People who live without any risk are hardly living. Their lives are sad and poor. Challenge yourselves. Expect more from people and force them to live to a higher standard!